Re: [PATCH] Pass amend to pre-commit hook

From: Øystein Walle <oystwa@gmail.com>
Date: Sep 27, 2015, 22:09 UTC
Message-ID: <loom.20150928T000850-141@post.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <20150914144727.GA25003@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff <at> peff.net> writes:

Show 22 quoted lines

> 
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 01:14:20PM +0100, Alan Clucas wrote:
> 
> > Pass a single parameter 'amend' to the pre-commit hook when performing a
> > commit amend.
> 
> I think this is a sensible thing to want, and it has come up a few
> times. I'm not sure why the last round didn't get merged, though. Looks
> like it just slipped through the cracks.
> 
> Here are the relevant threads:
> 
>   http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/260122
> 
>   http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/260245
> 
> Looks like there was some question of what to pass in the normal,
> non-amend case. I've added interested parties from the original thread
> to the cc here.
> 
> -Peff
>

There were so many different ways of solving them that we weren't able to decide between them:

Assuming we give the string "amend" as the hook's argv[1], what to do when --amend is not used? We can pass nothing, or the empty string, or the string "noamend". Then there was the suggestion of exporting GIT_AMEND=1 or something like that. In any case, what to do when we want to pass more arguments? Should we let the hook check argv[1] to decide whether --amend was used, argv[2] to check whether {some scenario here} is the case? Or make the hook author effectively implement options parsing?

And then it died out...

In my totally unprofessional opinion anything more complex than maybe passing "amend" in argv[1] is unwarranted. Since I posted my first patch almost a year ago there has been no discussion regarding passing other information along to pre-commit. Furthermore --amend is the only thing I know of that a pre-commit hook cannot discover on its own. On the other hand the desire for this has popped up at least twice on #git in the same time span.

Alan Clucas' solution looks fine to me. It is essentially the same as mine. But mine had tests and whatnot ;-)

Øsse